When 'Zero Tolerance' Becomes 'Zero Due Process'

National Catholic Register
Oct. 6-12, 2002

by WAYNE LAUGESEN
Register Correspondent

BOSTON - Few believe he is guilty, yet Msgr. Michael Smith Foster has been on administrative leave from the Archdiocese of Boston for more than a month.

His two suspensions are the result of sexual-abuse allegations so evidently baseless that the civil courts have dismissed them - with prejudice, meaning they can't be filed again - and the Boston Globe has run detailed exposés portraying the priest's accuser as a pathological liar.

His continued suspension, in light of exculpatory evidence that surfaces almost daily, has fueled arguments that "zero tolerance" toward sexual abuse has turned into zero due process for priests.

The first two weeks of Msgr. Foster's suspension were a matter of procedure. A 35-year-old man named Paul Edwards had accused Msgr. Foster and the late Father William Cummings of molesting him as a boy. The accusations came forth in a lawsuit filed in mid-August. Upon seeing the allegations, Msgr. Foster - the highest-ranking canon lawyer in the Archdiocese of Boston - placed himself on leave.

"Being the head judicial vicar, and therefore quite familiar with policies and procedures of the archdiocese, he requested to put himself on administrative leave from the outset, once he was presented with the allegations," said Helene Solomon, a spokeswoman for Msgr. Foster.

Once the lawsuit became public knowledge, however, friends and former parishioners of the priests came forward to denounce the accusations as baseless. Hundreds of children, who found each other on the Internet, launched a letter-writing campaign in defense of Msgr. Foster.

But it wasn't only friends and acquaintances of Msgr. Foster and Father Cummings who called the accusations into question. Former friends and acquaintances of Edwards also came forward voluntarily, giving detailed accounts of the man's history of lies as an adult and a child.

They told of the time Edwards tried to convince everyone he had been cast as an actor in the move Jaws. Several former friends and acquaintances told the Globe Edwards pretended, through much of his childhood, to be deaf. They said he lied as a young adult about playing semipro hockey and once fibbed that a relative - who was alive and well - had died.

Edwards' credibility continued to unravel throughout August, and even his lawyer spoke publicly about discrepancies in his accusations involving the two priests. On Sept. 3, with his fantasy world unraveling in the press, Edwards withdrew his case and a judge dismissed it with prejudice.

Twist of the Plot

On Sept. 6, three days after the case was dismissed, Msgr. Foster and his lawyers expressed dismay that nobody from the archdiocese had contacted them regarding a return to his duties. In response, Father Christopher Coyne of the archdiocese communication office told the Globe that archdiocese officials had "turned up the heat" on an internal investigation of Msgr. Foster so he could be cleared and returned to the ministry quickly.

But the Globe determined that few contacts had been made by the archdiocese with those who could shed light on the case.

On Sept. 10, Cardinal Bernard Law, archbishop of Boston, returned Msgr. Foster to duty and invited him to concelebrate a high-profile Sunday Mass with him to show the world he was back.

"The cardinal called Msgr. Foster to let him know he was being reinstated, right before Sept. 11," Solomon said. "And then sometime between that phone call and Friday, Sept. 13, Paul Edwards walked into the archdiocese - and we now believe that was on Sept. 12 - alleging that all he had said before, even though he had withdrawn the suit, was true."

Although Edwards had been thoroughly discredited in the Globe, on at least one Boston TV station and by a variety of people who knew Edwards well, Cardinal Law decided to reinstate Msgr. Foster's suspension on the basis of his meeting with Edwards.

"Basically, Msgr. Foster was planning his return, in conjunction with the archdiocese, and he gets a call on Friday the 13th saying, 'We need you to come in and see us, and we're putting you back on administrative leave,'" Solomon said. "So he went in and met with the delegates here in Boston, and he learned that there is absolutely nothing new, and there continues to be nothing new about this case. He went to the chancery for that Friday the 13th meeting, with his canonical counsel and his civil counsel, and his civil counsel were barred."

Donna Morrissey, Cabinet secretary for communications for the Boston Archdiocese, told the Register on Sept. 27 the investigation and suspension continue because it is archdiocesan policy to conduct a thorough investigation regardless of what the civil courts decide or what gets printed in newspapers. She would not comment on why Msgr. Foster's civil lawyers were banned from the Sept. 13 meeting.

"We are committed to fulfilling our policy and investigating each and every allegation that's brought forth," Morrissey said. "We are committed to taking into consideration the rights of the person bringing forth the allegation and also the rights of the accused priest. And any action we take in the course of an investigation should not be construed as an implication of guilt of the accused priest."

'Credible' Accusations?

A "zero-tolerance" sexual abuse policy adopted by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in June requires that all allegations brought to the attention of any diocese be reported to civil authorities and that each allegation be thoroughly investigated and reviewed internally.

Morrissey said the Archdiocese of Boston is following its own sexual-abuse policy, which is stricter than what the bishops' conference approved and was written before the June conference in Dallas.

In Dallas, bishops debated for hours whether a prelate should determine the "credibility" of an accusation before jeopardizing a priest's reputation by going public and initiating formal procedures, such as administrative leave. Several bishops argued they have received accusations that are obviously untrue.

Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Neb., said he hears from a drunken and mentally ill woman several times a month. The woman has accused nearly every priest in the diocese of attacking and raping her in the streets - all delusional accusations. Under strict interpretation of the new policy, Bishop Bruskewitz said, he would have to report the accusations to civil authorities every time the woman calls and initiate a formal diocesan investigation.

Morrissey said under Boston's policy, accusations are screened for credibility before a priest is placed on leave.

"Our policy requires that we get a clear understanding of the nature of the allegation," she said. "At that point we make a decision as to whether we need to investigate it further."

Asked whether that means not all allegations result in administrative leave and an internal investigation, Morrissey said, "That's correct." She did not know whether an allegation had been made that did not result in administrative leave and an investigation since the new policy - with roots back to 1993 - has been in place.

Morrissey said she couldn't comment on how long the investigation of Msgr. Foster would last or on the nature of the investigation.

"That's the most frustrating part of this whole thing," Msgr. Foster's spokeswoman Solomon said. "The process is very ill-defined. It's just very squishy."

Morrissey said "efforts will be made to restore the priest's reputation," should the investigation conclude that the allegations are without credibility. She would give no specifics on how Msgr. Foster's credibility might be restored.

"It's done on an individual basis, depending on circumstances of the case, but our policy requires that if an investigation determines an allegation is without credibility then efforts will be made to try to restore a priest's reputation," Morrissey said.

Msgr. Foster isn't certain his reputation will ever be the same, Solomon said.

"That's the $64,000 question and then some," she said. "Certainly the archdiocese sets out to say they will help to restore a priest's reputation. But how does he gain his reputation back? How does the archdiocese help him gain his reputation back? I think the quickest way for him to start to gain his reputation back is for them to close this so-called investigation and admit there's nothing there and get him back to work."

Severed Relationship

Critics of the new zero-tolerance policy adopted by bishops - and other diocesan zero-tolerance policies and procedures - say the new effort to show priority concern for victims has led some Church leaders to dismiss common sense. As a result, they say, priests such as Msgr. Foster get hung out to dry in response to even the silliest, most baseless charges.

"There is simply no way, in this environment, that a priest can go to his bishop with any kind of problem - and I mean any problem at all - without fear of losing his reputation in this witch hunt," said Father Steven Moore, a canon lawyer and vicar general for the Archdiocese of Anchorage, Alaska. "I advise priests it's no longer an option for them to go to the bishop with a personal problem and the bishop cannot serve as an advocate for the priests in his diocese. We have created a wedge between priests and bishops that we've never seen before, and it could prove terribly detrimental to the Church and the priesthood over time."

Morrissey said Cardinal Law and other officials in the Boston Archdiocese fully understand the need for priests to trust their bishops and for priests to be given all benefits of due process as prescribed in canon law.

"But our first priority is the protection of children," Morrissey said.

As it should be, Solomon said. She said the protection of children is the foremost concern of Msgr. Foster, which is why he has worked tirelessly to aid the archdiocese in its investigation of the Edwards allegations.

"He wanted them to get to the truth right away, and that's why he put himself on administrative leave immediately," Solomon said. "He's certainly doing everything he can to cooperate, and it's in his interest to do everything he can to speed it along. At the same time, it's just pretty frustrating to not know what the parameters are, to not know how long the investigation will go on and what the nature of the investigation is."

Solomon wouldn't say what Msgr. Foster thinks about the implementation of "zero tolerance" or about assertions of critics who say due process has been tossed.

But he made his feelings known in a public statement Sept. 14, after his reinstatement was canceled.

"It is inconceivable to me that the archdiocese could further delay my reinstatement based on nothing more than Paul Edwards' repetition of the same false allegations," Msgr. Foster said in the statement. "This is particularly shocking in light of the cardinal's phone call to me on Tuesday [Sept. 10] welcoming me back. The call followed not only the dismissal of the lawsuit but also the completion of a thorough investigation."

Solomon said the monsignor's case speaks volumes about the issues raised by the implementation of inflexible "zero-tolerance" policies.

"You have the answers to those concerns in this whole story," Solomon said. "You've got the answers to what can go wrong when a good priest is accused just in the chain of events that have occurred here."